”I think the majority of Europe is ready to accept a Palestinian state.”

Barry Seal, Leader of a bloc of 32 representatives from the British Labor Party – European parliament, Sept. 14 1988

Today, Yasser Arafat, the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, addressed members of the European Parliament. Contrary to speculations, Arafat did not announce the formation of a Palestinian provisional government.

Arafat however said that only the Palestine National Council could take such action. The council, a sort of parliament in exile, is composed of about 500 Palestinian representatives.

In a historical moment, Arafat said he accepted United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338. The Resolutions call for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories and the recognition by Arab states of Israel’s right to exist.

Intelligence

Dalkamoni returns from Cyprus to Germany. With several members of the PFLP-GC, he is actively preparing the bombing of several airliners.

The welcome granted to Arafat by European Parliament members has probably not left Ahmed Jibril, the founder and head of the PFLP-GC, overjoyed. During the fall of 1988, Jibril reaffirmed the three goals of his organization.

”The three aims of the PFLP-GC are: the liberation of Palestine through the elimination of PLO leader Yasser Arafat and other American collaborators; the continuation of the fight against America; and the need to remain in the shadows behind any terrorist action. ”

The PFLP-GC, the PPSF and the Abu Nidal Organization are absolutely opposed to a peaceful solution of the conflict and adamantly reject Israel’s right to exist. Western Intelligence Agencies expect these groups to conduct one or several spectacular acts of terrorism to put an end to Arafat ongoing diplomatic success.

Back to the Present (2008)

According to Pr. Black, the court set up for the appeal of megrahi has taken the unprecedented decision to order the partial release of the secret document to a “special counsel”.

“Has there in fact been a decision by the High Court of Justiciary on the Foreign Secretary’s claim of public interest immunity (PII) in the Lockerbie appeal? It has been suggested to me (from a source claiming that the information came from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office) that at the closed hearing [1] that took place on 19 August 2008 the court ordered that a summary of the documents in question (prepared by whom?) should be given to a “special counsel” (with what qualifications, and appointed by whom?) and not to Abdelbaset Megrahi’s chosen legal team,” Pr Black wrote.

“If this information is accurate, two important questions need to be asked. They are: 1. Is it satisfactory, or tolerable, that such a decision be taken at a court hearing from which the appellant and his legal representatives are excluded? 2. Is it satisfactory, or tolerable, that no opinion is published by the court announcing its decision and explaining the reasons for it?”